You invoked the McSteve? Sure. I'll be there. I'm planning on bringing my tool bag and working with Brandon on getting our network rebuilt, but I will certainly dedicate some time to this suggested discussion. If there is any way I can help keep this group working harmoniously together, I'm all about that. If nothing else, I am really interested to hear some of the differing opinions. I'd like to understand these suggested changes to the bylaws and etc., as well as the motivations behind them.

Pete, can you bring a dead-tree version of the proposed bylaws, and whatever else might be relevant? I will try and have a copy, but my printer is somewhat unreliable right now.

I'll be at the H.F. tonight, arriving by 7:30 or maybe by 7. My two cents is that this amendment stuff seems a lot to accomplish in such a short time and I feel things would go more smoothly if we address what we first set out to do in the annual meeting and expect then to have a special meeting afterward. Supporting this approach is the idea that some questions or topics may come up at the annual meeting that would require a follow-up anyway.

wammie wrote:I'll be at the H.F. tonight, arriving by 7:30 or maybe by 7. My two cents is that this amendment stuff seems a lot to accomplish in such a short time and I feel things would go more smoothly if we address what we first set out to do in the annual meeting and expect then to have a special meeting afterward. Supporting this approach is the idea that some questions or topics may come up at the annual meeting that would require a follow-up anyway.

Perhaps, but I'm willing to give it a go, I can be brutally concise when need be, and this should be pretty simple, and seems to be covered by the statues.

I think that *if* proposed amendments can be drawn up, clearly and concisely organized, and ready for a vote at the upcoming meeting, it might as well be done. The window of time before the legal notice of the meeting is sent out is closing, though. If the agenda and proxy documents need changed after that, another notice will need to be sent out. I'm not sure if there's a minimum number of days before a meeting that notices need to be given, but I will find out. Remember too that for any member who has not expressly granted consent to receive notices by email, these sorts of things do need to go out via U.S. Mail.

My biggest fear, which I suggest we take pains to avoid, is that the upcoming meeting will degenerate into a disorganized shouting match, and nothing productive will come of it. We have a large group, and very little experience in moderating a large group discussion. That is why I say that any proposed amendments need to be ready as quickly as possible. Under ideal circumstances, we should be able to bring the meeting to order, vote on the ballot items presented, and adjourn. If there's room in there for some brief discussion, great. I just want to see everyone walk out of the meeting secure in the knowledge that the group, as a whole, is getting what it wants. As individuals, not everyone will be happy with the direction that is taken, but at least that direction will be chosen fairly.

Am I making sense here, folks? I generally hesitate to get too involved in the politics, but dammit, I can't afford for this group to lose cohesion and risk falling apart. I want to see people working together and getting this whole mess figured out. I want the outcome that satisfies as many people as possible, and I want everyone to feel that their voice has been heard. I go to the Hack Factory because I have neither the space or the money for the kinds of tools I want to use. I go and hang around because I want to be able to discuss my project ideas with people who won't just give me blank stares. Now that I've found group of peers who have similar interests to me, and actually understand WTF I'm talking about most of the time, I am not willing to lose that.

McSteve, well said! Yes, completely sensible notions there, and I think an expression of the same intent that most of us have for the meeting. Thanks for your thoughtful input on this and other discussion threads.

I'll be there tonight to help get this together in whatever shape it takes.

A couple thoughts..

It's a really big priority for me that we're able to pass improved bylaws at the annual meeting. The new ones are way better than the old in so many ways, and this just plain needs to happen.

It's also a big deal to me that everybody's voice gets heard, and everyone has their vote counted.

I'm all about democracy , really I am, but I'm also all about making sure that the voices of the one or the few don't get drowned out by the roar of the many. I have a feeling (just a feeling, it's not informed or backed up with any statistics or anything) that most of our members , like myself, would be fine with the bylaws as they stand.

However, they really need to be presented with the chance to make an informed choice.

One last thing; I'm going to be asking our lawyer to weigh in on the proposed amendments as to whether or not he thinks they are a good idea, pros, cons, etc. I'm going to ask that the members get to hear his opinion. I hope this will carry some weight with all of us when it comes time to vote.

Thanks to all of you for coming to the table and discussing this stuff, it's just huge, and stuff like this is why I like being a part of this group.

paul, the overall gist of that is correct, but it's not 100% accurate. the important distinction is that the board must unanimously approve changes due to it being shorter than the board notice period.

i've spoken with our lawyer once by phone and exchanged a few emails, we're still attempting to sort this out.

In the interest of keep threads on track, greater unity and harmony, and perhaps truth, justice and the American way, or not. I started a thread on specific amendments to the by-laws, got something you want to change, please head here.